If anything, the publication standards in Einstein's day were much stricter than they are now [I'm speaking from experience here] - so much rubbish gets published that the reliability of published scientific information is now much less than it used to be. Reviewing "peers" now are third-raters, since everyone more prominent has more important things to do. In Einstein's day the journals were staffed with very solid first- and second-rate scientists who had to decide on the publication. In my field, if you take a German language article from 1905, its experimental part is like gold standard. Ditto for the Brits - up to about 1940s-50s.
I think you have just made my point.
Scientific theories today which go against the status quo are sidelined. Then everybody points out that the theories can't be good, since they haven't been published in peer-reviewed journals. Einstein would probably have met the same fate if today's peer reviewers were reviewing his articles in his day.